


Meta on Magical Realism

by ChokolatteJedi



Category: Multi-Fandom
Genre: Fantasy, Gen, Magical Realism, Meta, Science Fiction, Spoilers (probably)
Language: English
Status: Completed
Published: 2018-02-01
Updated: 2018-02-01
Packaged: 2019-03-14 12:07:41
Rating: General Audiences
Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply
Chapters: 1
Words: 2,253
Publisher: archiveofourown.org
Story URL: https://archiveofourown.org/works/13589736
Author URL: https://archiveofourown.org/users/ChokolatteJedi/pseuds/ChokolatteJedi
Summary: Dissecting Magical Realism in canons and then in fanfic.





	Meta on Magical Realism

**Author's Note:**

> Written for the final 1MW "Give it a Whirl" prompt of "Creative non-fiction"

So today I'm going to discuss Magical Realism in fanfiction and in canons. So, when this challenge to write a Magical Realism fic for 1 Million Words was made, I had a vague notion that I knew what it meant, but I googled it just to double check.

According to Wikipedia:

> [Magical Realism is] a genre of narrative fiction and, more broadly, art (literature, painting, film, theatre, etc.) that, while encompassing a range of subtly different concepts, expresses a primarily realistic view of the real world while also adding or revealing magical elements. It is sometimes called fabulism, in reference to the conventions of fables, myths, and allegory. "Magical realism", perhaps the most common term, often refers to fiction and literature in particular, with magic or the supernatural presented in an otherwise real-world or mundane setting.

Right, that pretty much jives with what I thought. Set in the real world, but with some magic. Not enough magic to be considered fantasy, but _some._ I was good to go. Of course, then I kept reading the article, and had my notions turned on their heads.

Magical Realism seems to originate or predominate (Wikipedia and Britannica disagree) in Latin American literature, and one of the examples was actually a book I am quite fond of, _Like Water For Chocolate_.

Unfortunately, that book isn't exactly a writing fandom for me. :P I suppose I could have made an icon, but I wanted to write something.

Another distinction made about Magical Realism was to differentiate between it and sci-fi.

Again, from Wikipedia:

> While science fiction and magical realism both bend the notion of what is real, toy with human imagination, and are forms of (often fantastical) fiction, they differ greatly. Bower's cites Aldous Huxley's Brave New World as a novel that exemplifies the science fiction novel's requirement of a "rational, physical explanation for any unusual occurrences". [...] Bowers argues that, "The science fiction narrative's distinct difference from magical realism is that it is set in a world different from any known reality and its realism resides in the fact that we can recognize it as a possibility for our future. Unlike magical realism, it does not have a realistic setting that is recognizable in relation to any past or present reality."

Well, that makes things both clearer and less clear. For example, it seems to make a clear distinction that "explainable" science elements would not count as magical realism. So bye-bye X-Men and other genetic mutants. Bye-bye zombies or other things with a medical basis. Bye-bye technologically-based supervillains like Gru or Syndrome.

But Bowers also argues that the world of sci-fi has to be unrecognizable to our reality. Does that mean that the _X-men_ (at least on our planet) or shows that take place in a logical and recognizable American town actually don't count? This would mean that shows like _Dr. Horrible, Dollhouse, Cabin in the Woods,_ or _Eureka,_ would not be categorized as "real" sci-fi, and thus be re-eligible as Magical Realism.

I think this is too narrow a definition of sci-fi, but the first part is still usable for our purposes. If the "magic" has a scientific, logical explanation, then it isn't Magical Realism.

Okay, so that rules out many things. Obviously pure fantasy fandoms, like your _Dragonriders of Pern_ or your Disney Princesses, don't count. [Side note, I think _Brave_ would count, if we only saw the wisps. The witch and bear magic tips it into fantasy, but wisps seem like exactly the kind of thing this genre was made for.][Second side note, I feel like _Pocahontas_ has a similar closeness. I could count Grandmother Willow as Magical Realism, but the animal companions push it over the edge.]

But what about _Atlantis?_ Are crystals considered science, or magic? The concession that the crystals power things would seem to place the Atlantis civilization on the cusp of Magical Realism. Some things seem to teeter between a scientific and a magical explanation, which therefor also teeter on the brink of Magical Realism or sci-fi.

For example, see shows like _Warehouse 13_ and the _Librarians_. Both deal with fantastical elements in our real world. _Warehouse 13_ tends to treat their fantastical elements as more scientific, in my opinion, while _Librarians_ goes a bit more towards the magic side.

In fact, I fulfilled the "Take a Whirl" challenge by writing for the _Librarians_ , because I thought it fit the Magical Realism genre.

But since writing it, I began to second guess myself and my definitions. How much fantasy was too much fantasy?

Shows like _Buffy the Vampire Slayer_ and _Supernatural_ , where the fantastical elements greatly overtake our world seem excluded as a given. _Harry Potter_ seems the same.

But what of books like the _Kitty Norville_ series or the _Hollows_ series? There, a hint of magic intrudes upon the real world, either in the form of werewolves, or other magical denizens. These are often called "urban fantasy," but what differentiates that from Magical Realism?

Or what of _The Addams Family_? They have some magical elements, to be sure, but they do not live in a wholly fantasy world. Unlike your _Harry Potter, Charmed,_ or _Sabrina the Teenage Witch,_ where a separate, magical world does exist, and simply intrudes upon the normal one, the Addams really do seem to live in our actual world. But they happen to be immune to many forms of death, if the children's playtime scenes are to be believed. Oh, and disembodied hands can walk and books have magic. That certainly seems to fit the Magical Realism as described so far.

Superhero genres are another question mark. A standard universe plus superheroes, like _the Incredibles,_ seems to fit the bill, provided that the powers can't be explained through science. (Other than Syndrome, this would appear to be the case. Although, genetics?) However, many tip over either into science, when they explain every power away, or into pure fantasy, when they just get too outrageous to justify. (I'm looking at you, replenishable Joker minions)

But what of hybrid superhero stories, such as _The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen_? Sure, Moriarty is all about the science, as is Mina, but Grey? Or the witch doctor stuff? Pure magic. Do those slight magical elements in an otherwise steampunk "science" story count as Magical Realism?

Again, it comes back to the question: how much fantasy is too much fantasy?

To that end, one crucial element of Magical Realism appears to be the idea of the common place. From wikipedia:

> In fantasy, the presence of the supernatural code is perceived as problematic, something that draws special attention—where in magical realism, the presence of the supernatural is accepted. In fantasy, while authorial reticence creates a disturbing effect on the reader, it works to _integrate the supernatural_ into the natural framework in magical realism. This integration is made possible in magical realism as the author presents the supernatural as being equally valid to the natural. There is no hierarchy between the two codes. The ghost of Melquíades in Márquez's _One Hundred Years of Solitude_ or the baby ghost in Toni Morrison's _Beloved_ who visit or haunt the inhabitants of their previous residence are both presented by the narrator as ordinary occurrences; the reader, therefore, accepts the marvelous as normal and common

So, it would appear, that moreso than amount of fantastical elements vs mundane, the difference between fantasy set in our world and Magical Realism is the _integration_ of the magical elements. In shows like _The Librarians,_ while the Library's magic becomes commonplace to those exposed to it, it is very much a wonder at first sight. Thus, it appears to actually be a fantasy series that happens to be set in basically the real world, not a Magical Realism series.

Even _The Addams Family_ , which seemed so promising, must be questioned in this light. While the family views these things as common place, the rest of the world is terrified of them. Could the Addams live in a Magically Realistic world, which to everyone else appears to be some sort of grim fantasy?

So what does qualify as Magical Realism, then?

 _The Golden Compass_ world is clearly fantasy, but perhaps "everyone has a daemon" AUs of realistic cannons would count as Magical Realism. If the magical (daemon) element is treated as completely unquestioned, this seems to fit the bill. Similar fusions with the _Cthulhu Mythos_ might also qualify. You know, the one where so and so suddenly has tentacles, but we don't question it.

Can Magical Realism be Magical _Horror_ Realism? After all, two book examples given on the Magical Realism passage quoted above include ghost visitation as what puts the "magical" in magical realism. Could the "gods" elements of _Cabin in the Woods_ be enough to bring it into the Magical Realism realm, despite it's science elements?

What of ghost movies? The presence of the ghost(s) is often shocking, but enough to ding it out of the Magical Realism category? Not always. Clearly something like the new _Ghostbusters_ is too fantastical, but is the old one? Science can capture the ghosts but what creates them? Some science, sure, but also some magic? What of _The VVitch_ , which acts like we live in the real world (albeit in the past) but that goat is actually the devil!

Barring those, the only other canons that spring to mind are magical romcoms. Movies like _Big_ , or _What Women Want_ , seem to have a magical element that is basically accepted. Tom Hanks is shocked that he does grow up, but not necessarily shocked that it is possible. Ditto for _What Women Want_. Mel Gibson is going crazy with his power, but is he that disbelieving that it could happen? How about _Benjamin Button?_ People seem pretty chill with his reverse-aging thing. Or _Stranger than Fiction_ , where the conflict is not that she is literally writing his life, but that she is writing his death, and she wants to spare him that.

Or look at the original _Jumanji._ While the animals cause destruction, that seems more problematic to the characters than the fact that the game is just suddenly magic!

Lastly, there is a category that I'm not sure counts as _magical_ realism, but that I feel has to be included in this discussion. Old school movie musicals (and _La La Land_ ). You know, the ones where people just burst into song and dance and no one thinks that is strange. Surely that ticks every box we've established for Magical Realism, except for the question of whether the music is also magical.

In some instances, such as _Sound of Music_ , there is a logical explanation for some of the scenes. They're doing a puppet show, or putting on a performance for guests. But the young lovers in the garden or “My Favorite Things?” Less clear origins. You see similar examples in _White Christmas_. For most of the songs, the four leads are putting on a performance of some kind, thus justifying their actions. I could even think of justifying "Count your Blessings" because they're song writers and specifically talk about composing it and putting it in the show. But the "Snow" song on the train is the exception. Yes, these are singers, but they aren't currently performing. And where did the invisible orchestra come from?

Other old school movie musicals do even less to justify their characters breaking out into song. Take _My Fair Lady_ , wherein no song is logically justified, or any number of Disney movie musicals. Disney’s _Hercules_ casts the Muses as narrators, justifying all of their songs, but the solos by Hercules, Phil, or Meg before the Muses join her? Nada.

 _Buffy the Vampire Slayer_ actually addresses this by having a demon come and turn their world into a movie musical, which the characters question after the fact, but not while in the midst of a song. If you could call Buffy realistic, then this episode would come very close to Magical Realism, I think.

 _Cracked After Hours_ has an interesting discussion about the world of movie musicals in [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5m8SdMf_hH0) episode, which touches on some of these ideas. They also covered magical romcoms in [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3nSjF9W8I0) episode, though in a very different context.

In the end, I think we have more of a definition of exclusion. I can tell you what _isn't_ Magical Realism far more easily than I can tell you what _is_ Magical Realism.

To that end, I think that in the past I've successfully(ish) written two Magical Realism pieces before, as I no longer think that my _Librarians_ one I wrote for the 1 Million Words Magical Realism challenge actually counts. :P

The first that I think (mostly) counts is a _Chicago_ fic, [None of the Girls Escaped Mama](https://archiveofourown.org/works/614526). [Warnings for dark things like tentacle assault] Roxie is shocked to find that Mama has tentacles, but it is within the realm of the story.

The second, which I think is actually a really good fit, is a _Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters_ AU. [Pulling a Tampa](https://archiveofourown.org/works/2848559) is set in the modern world of jeeps and laptops, but things like witches and magic wands exist without comment.

I imagine that there are several so-called "Coffee Shop AUs" for magical fandoms which see this blend of realism and fantastical elements that might qualify for the Magical Realism label.

It would also be interesting to see what authors actually _tag_ as Magical Realism. Because really, nowadays, the commonly understood definition seems to _literally_ be more important than the true definition. ;)


End file.
